Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The Plot Against Liberal America

By Thomas Frank, The New Statesman. Posted August 18, 2008.


Conservatives don't want to debate, they want to destroy their opposition.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

More stories by Thomas Frank

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The most cherished dream of conservative Washington is that liberalism can somehow be defeated, finally and irreversibly, in the way that armies are beaten and pests are exterminated. Electoral victories by Republicans are just part of the story. The larger vision is of a future in which liberalism is physically barred from the control room -- of an "end of history" in which taxes and onerous regulation will never be allowed to threaten the fortunes private individuals make for themselves. This is the longing behind the former White House aide Karl Rove's talk of "permanent majority" and, 20 years previously, disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff's declaration to the Republican convention that it's "the job of all revolutions to make permanent their gains."

When I first moved to contemplate this peculiar utopian vision, I was struck by its apparent futility. What I did not understand was that beating liberal ideas was not the goal. The Washington conservatives aim to make liberalism irrelevant not by debating, but by erasing it. Building a majority coalition has always been a part of the program, and conservatives have enjoyed remarkable success at it for more than 30 years. But winning elections was not a bid for permanence by itself. It was only a means.

The end was capturing the state, and using it to destroy liberalism as a practical alternative. The pattern was set by Margaret Thatcher, who used state power of the heaviest-handed sort to implant permanently the anti-state ideology.

"Economics are the method; the object is to change the soul," she said, echoing Stalin. In the 34 years before she became prime minister, Britain rode a see-saw of nationalization, privatization and renationalization; Thatcher set out to end the game for good. Her plan for privatising council housing was designed not only to enthrone the market, but to encourage an ownership mentality and "change the soul" of an entire class of voters. When she sold off nationally owned industries, she took steps to ensure that workers received shares at below-market rates, leading hopefully to the same soul transformation. Her brutal suppression of the miners' strike in 1984 showed what now awaited those who resisted the new order. As a Business Week reporter summarized it in 1987: "She sees her mission as nothing less than eradicating Labour Party socialism as a political alternative."

In their own pursuit of the free-market utopia, America's right-wingers did not have as far to travel as their British cousins, and they have never needed to use their state power so ruthlessly. But the pattern is the same: scatter the left's constituencies, hack open the liberal state and reward friendly businesses with the loot.

Grover Norquist, one of the most influential conservatives in Washington and the "field marshal of the Bush plan," according to the Nation magazine, has been most blunt about using the power of the state "to crush the structures of the left." He has outlined the plan countless times in countless venues: the liberal movement is supported by a number of "pillars," each of which can be toppled by conservatives when in power. Among Norquist's suggestions has been the undermining of defense lawyers -- who in the US give millions of dollars to liberal causes -- with measures "potentially costing [them] billions of dollars of lost income." Conservatives could also "crush labour unions as a political entity" by forcing unions to get annual written approval from every member before spending union funds on political activities. His coup de grace is that the Democratic Party in its entirety would become "a dead man walking" with the privatization of social security.

Much of this program has already been accomplished, if not on the precise terms Norquist suggested. The shimmering dream of privatizing social security, though, remains the great unreachable right-wing prize, and the right persists in the campaign, regardless of the measure's unpopularity or the number of political careers it costs. President Bush announced privatisation to be his top priority on the day after his re-election in 2004, although he had not emphasized this issue during the campaign. He proceeded to chase it deep into the land of political unpopularity, a region from which he never really returned.

He did this because the potential rewards of privatizing social security justify any political cost. At one stroke, it would both de-fund the operations of government and utterly reconfigure the way Americans interact with the state. It would be irreversible, too; the "transition costs" in any scheme to convert social security are so vast that no country can consider incurring them twice. Once the deal has been done and the trillions of dollars that pass through social security have been diverted from the US Treasury to stocks in private companies, the effects would be locked in for good. First, there would be an immediate flood of money into Wall Street; second, there would be an equivalent flow of money out of government accounts, immediately propelling the federal deficit up into the stratosphere and de-funding a huge part of the federal activity.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: the wrecking crew

Thomas Frank is the author of "The Wrecking Crew."

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
amen
Posted by: Eat Politicians on Aug 18, 2008 12:35 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
to that...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: amen Posted by: weathered
» Prove it Posted by: EinMD
» "Have fun storming the castle" Posted by: LionHeart
» If this be conspiracy, Posted by: Lloyd Drako
» RE: If this be conspiracy, Posted by: LionHeart
» RE: If this be conspiracy, Posted by: Crazy H
Total Agreement
Posted by: daniel1982 on Aug 18, 2008 12:40 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The larger vision is of a future in which liberalism is physically barred from the control room -- of an "end of history" in which taxes and onerous regulation will never be allowed to threaten the fortunes private individuals make for themselves

This is a great goal to strive for. Certainly a worthy ideal to have.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Total Agreement Posted by: Wacre
» RE: Organized Crime. Posted by: sasquuatch55
» Profit Posted by: EinMD
» Actually Posted by: emmas
» RE: Actually Posted by: daniel1982
» RE: Actually Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: Actually Posted by: daniel1982
» RE: Actually Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: Actually Posted by: daniel1982
» RE: Actually Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: Total Agreement Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Total Agreement Posted by: daniel1982
Call Them What They Are ... Fascists
Posted by: mmckinl on Aug 18, 2008 12:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It isn't conservatism and it is not just the Republicans. There are many, many Democrats that abide inside the Military Industrial Complex.

Democrats are beholden to Corporate Media and the Health Care Industrial Complex, including Big Pharma and Insurance Companies. Democrats are now eating the same poison fruit contributions as the Republicans and it is we the American Public that will suffer.

What America is facing is fascism plain and simple. What we have is a One Party system ... fascism sooner or fascism later, in your face fascism or smiley face fascism. In the end it is the same.

The wild card is the failing economy and it looks to be bringing down the whole sordid, rotten, corrupt system with it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What's funny about all this Posted by: clvngodess
» One thing We can do Posted by: Spot
» Good point, vote McKinney. Posted by: Prophit
» RE: Good point, vote McKinney. Posted by: Cybershaman
» Blah blah blah blah. Posted by: EinMD
» RE: Blah blah blah blah. Posted by: Cybershaman
» Whatever Posted by: EinMD
» Sociopaths & Leadership Posted by: EinMD
» Money is America's "God" Posted by: Cathyc
» On Identifying The Enemy Within Posted by: TarryFaster
Why Are Bankers In Charge of Our Money ?
Posted by: mmckinl on Aug 18, 2008 1:20 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thomas Frank says : " Regardless of who borrowed the money, these debts must be repaid -- and repaying them, in turn, means that a nation must agree to restructure its economy the way bankers bid: by deregulating, privatizing and cutting spending."

The questions should be : Why are we paying interest on our own money ? ! and; Why do bankers have a monopoly on the creation of our money when the Constitution clearly states that it is the Government's Right and Responsibility to create our money ? !

Benjamin Franklin helped create our most successful bank. The bank used fiat paper money and there was little to no inflation for years and years. Adam Smith even commented on its success in his book Wealth of Nations!

~Adam Smith wrote of the Pennsylvania currency in his famed 1776 work The Wealth of Nations:
The government of Pennsylvania, without amassing any [gold or silver], invented a method of lending, not money indeed, but what is equivalent to money to its subjects. [It advanced] to private people at interest, upon [land as collateral], paper bills of credit…made transferable from hand to hand like bank notes, and declared by act of assembly to be legal tender in all payments...[the system] went a considerable way toward defraying the annual expense…of that…government [low taxes]. [Pennsylvania’s] paper currency…is said never to have sunk below the value of gold and silver which was current in the colony before the…issue of paper money.~ 1

Benjamin Franklin attributed Our Revolution to England banning Colonial Money! ~2

1.Adam Smith, 2.Benjamin Franklin

It is banks that have gotten us into this mess of corporatism and economic failure. It is time for Progressives and Liberals to call for a Public Central Bank that issues our money without interest to help pay for our Common Good.

Why should we doing the bankers bidding? It is our money. Until the issue of money returns to the hands of the people there will be no justice and there will be no peace.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» [ land as collateral ] Posted by: caru
Republican hatred for liberals
Posted by: HughScott on Aug 18, 2008 2:14 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In my 2004 self-published (Xlibris) nonfiction book, George Dub-ya Bush, THE PHONY FIGHTER PILOT,
I asserted the following:

Phony Fighter Pilot reveals George Junior for what he is: a conniving rightwing ideologue who hijacked the GOP I once loved and turned it into a sanctuary for the dregs of American society―-rich bigots, racist rednecks, gun nuts, homophobes, hypocrites, fascists, control freaks-—the Trent Lotts, Tom Delays, Jerry Falwells, Ralph Reeds, Bill Bennetts, Charlton Hestons, Ann Coulters, Rush Limbaughs, G. Gordon Liddys, Sean Hannities...the list goes on and on.

Those assorted groups and individuals have one thing in common. They hate liberals with a passion, which I don’t understand.

According to my dictionary, liberal means being a “free-man, not restricted,” someone who “favors political reform.” My fourth great grandfather, John Scott, fits that description perfectly.

He, too, wanted unrestricted freedom and political reform. So in 1776, John grabbed his musket, left his rural Vermont farm and fought the British Redcoats. I write about his valiant military service in Chapter 15.

In my mind, John Scott and millions of Americans like him today--modern liberals--are the true patriots, not rightwing Republicans. Liberals cherish individual freedom and will defend it to their deaths, if necessary. I think that’s admirable. Rightwing Republicans feel just the opposite. Listen to Talk Radio or watch Fox News, substitute “Jews” for “liberals” and you will get a taste of what Nazi Germany was like before WWII.



*Hugh E. Scott, Vietnam vet, lifelong registered Republican and ardent Obama supporter
Seven reasons to vote against Unfit McCain

*For the benefit of new AlterNet visitors

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» That makes sense, Hugh Posted by: Cathyblj
» Unfortunately... Posted by: EinMD
» Lefties Posted by: EinMD
» RE: Lefties Posted by: Krotos
» RE: Lefties Posted by: EinMD
» RE: Lefties Posted by: Krotos
» RE: Lefties Posted by: EinMD
» Actually I'm a centrist Posted by: EinMD
» RE: Lefties Posted by: Cathyblj
» The List Posted by: EinMD
» RE: Lefties Posted by: Spot
» Ding! Ding! Ding! Posted by: EinMD
borrow and spend Republicans
Posted by: whealeydj on Aug 18, 2008 3:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is an accurate description of radical rightwing Republicans which has ruined this country for last 27 years. This is an ecellent article and I hope all Americans and Alterneters realize that there are subtantive difference between Obama and McCain which matter in who to vote for.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Ideas Posted by: EinMD
Liberalism = Treason
Posted by: Tom Degan on Aug 18, 2008 3:17 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You've heard it all before. We "hate America"; We "don't support the troops"; We're "just a bunch of flag burnin' commies".

Yaddah! Yaddah! Yaddah, Warden!

The right wing are the biggest group of crybabies, are'nt they? And dumb? Dumber than dog shit, baby! At least in the good ol' days, they had a heavyweight intellect like Charle Lindbergh as their spokesman. Whom do they have today? William Kristol??? Please.

You've got to admit, though, they really did come up with a brilliant trick. They've got a HUGE segment of this once-great nation voting against the interests of themselves and their children! And you're surprised that the United Ststes has become the laughingstock of the entire Milky Way?

What has me alterneting (SHAMELESS PLUG) between laughter and rage is the insinuation that I am not patriotic. These idiots just won't understand the fact that the very public stand that I took against this disgusting administration is the most patriotic thing I have ever done in my entire life (I just turned fifty on Saturday - me and the material girl).

And speaking of birthdays, if you have a friend or loved one who has a birthday coming up, I have a lovely little gift suggestion:

Go out and buy them a fucking clue

Cheerio!

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
Jerome Corsi is a Liar and a Pedophile

AFTERTHOUGHT:
This is somewhat off-topic but when I turned fifty on Sunday, CNN broadcast a piece called "Fifty Is The New Cool" Right. It's nice to be fifty - better to turn fifty than not - no doubt about it. Think of all the grat people who never reached that age:

Lenny Bruce
John Lennon
Janis Joplin
Martin Luther King
Malcom X
Ernie Kovacs

That ain't cool! But turning fifty, in itself, is not "cool". Here's what's cool:

Being Twenty
Being twenty-five pounds lighter
Not having to wear glasses
Having a great build
Having ALL the ladies finding me attractive.

That was "cool".

I'm going to go out on a limb here:

That was very, very "cool"!

peace....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Liberalism = Treason Posted by: LionHeart
» RE: Liberalism = Treason Posted by: Steve Adair
» RE: Liberalism = Treason Posted by: rinthy
» Mr Degan .... Posted by: skoog5600
» RE: Mr Degan .... Posted by: Tom Degan
» Tom's invaluable tom-tom... Posted by: Knowmad
» RE: Liberalism = Treason Posted by: Thucy
» RE: Liberalism = Treason Posted by: Tom Degan
» RE: Liberalism = Treason Posted by: dustdevil
» RE: Liberalism = Treason Posted by: Aureantes
» RE: Liberalism = Treason Posted by: beautifulady2003
» Never Underestimate the Enemy Posted by: ClearEye
The proper link:
Posted by: Tom Degan on Aug 18, 2008 3:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: The proper link: Posted by: chuckjs
» RE: The proper link: Posted by: Tom Degan
» Jerome Corsi Posted by: Lloyd Drako
Excellent article
Posted by: jebpgh on Aug 18, 2008 3:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Once again, Frank is spot on. After all, the most affluent counties in the United States are the ones that surround Washington DC - the GOP has under it's leadership not reduced the size of government - contrary to their so-called ideology - they increased it. The difference is that while increasing it, they also outsourced it. Our office is in McLean and it is the fastest growing office market in the US - Tyson's Corner will soon have more office footage than Atlanta. McCain will not reduce this government - he will continue to outsource it to the loyal friends and contributors that are trying to hold on to their economic advantage.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thomas Frank should go back beyond Thatcher to William the Conquerer
Posted by: Suzon on Aug 18, 2008 4:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The pattern was set by Margaret Thatcher, who used state power of the heaviest-handed sort to implant permanently the anti-state ideology.

William the Conquerer, the Norman invader, rapist, arsonist, pillager and murderer, awarded the first royal charter to the Corporation of the City of London in 1067, making it (like the Vatican) a self-regulating entity. This world financial center continues to be above the law to this day.

The history of the Norman-English monarchy (Elizabeth II is a direct descendant of William I) has been a bloody one for all concerned. The poor starved and the rich fought each other to the death--that is, until about 300 years ago when they learned to use law instead of violence to keep their wealth and amass even more.

This invisible warfare continues because there are terrible penalties for losing (hunger, homelessness) and fantastic gains for winning (ask Bill Gates or Rupert Murdoch).

The war against ordinary people is ruthlessly waged by the privileged in large part because they have very good reason to fear justice.

Here's a choice to consider: national security or personal security? If everyone had the latter, there would be no need for or excuse based upon the former.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Con-serve-a-tards. No Health Care! No Elderly Care! All 4 ME & 0-4-U!
Posted by: williameon on Aug 18, 2008 4:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All 4 ME & NONE-4-U!

Sounds good to me?
Just give me a Lotto ticket, a pack of Butts and a six pack of Foreign Beer.
And Just in case I win, Lotto please lower the Taxes on the RICH!
Yea, That’s the ticket!
Anyone who listens to:
The Con-serve-a-TARD Fascist BU__! SH__!
With a straight face
Is an ignorant A-shole.

Reptilian Hatchet Men get
Endless time in the Faux Media bashing the American Middle Class while the
Talking Heads Parrot Rovien Propaganda.
Equal time please!
We are tired of eating Corpirate Garbage.
ROVIEN BU__! SH__!

Watch the Propagandist please while
The Reptilians run away with the BANK!
Fort Knox is Empty!
All the Gold is GONE!
Tens of Millions of millions GONE and who is left holding the bag?

No information means= NO DEMOCRACY.
One Corpirate-Nation rules the World.
The wealthiest Family in the World owns it.
50% of EVERYTHING!

With thousands of microscopes, spies, listening devices and probes shoved up your Ass
What are they looking for?
SH-T.
They’re HERE!
They’ve found it!
Gee, Willy cats and you wonder why the Country is falling a part.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» What tune is this sung to? Posted by: ClearEye
The Menshiviks Would Be Proud
Posted by: pdxjoe on Aug 18, 2008 4:55 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Liberalism, as we know it, arose out of a compromise between left-wing social movements and business interests. It depends on the efficient functioning of certain organs of the state; it does not call for all-out war on private industry."

You might as well replace "liberalism" with "late capitalism."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

De Privatization Movement....HR 676 and US Owned OIL
Posted by: Purple Girl on Aug 18, 2008 4:59 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's time we demand that our Gov't take back the responsibilities it was developed to manage.
End Private contractorsfor basic needs of citizens and country .This model has been played out and has FAILED..

1st Fire the Federal Reserve- the Treasury Dept is responsible for this National Interest
and security

Revoke all publically owned land leases to Oil and energy Corps- Poachers. Return our nations energy resources to US-REAL 'ENERGY INDEPENDENCE'..Dept of Energy's duty

Pass legislation which ends Insurance Corps abilitiy to sell Health coverage..the Dept of Health/Human Service Depts Duty (Conyers HR 676)

Remove food commodities off theStock Market (corn, wheat, dairy..). Dept of Agriculture

End Military sub contractors -If we don't have the military personnel, we should not be involved-Dept of Defense to keep numbers up

these are the main areas which humankind aimed to mamange when WE developed the idea of a governing body.WE never intended middlemen to profit from these very basic needs. These are the ESSENTIALS to any society,it is time we grab them back from the corp Profiteers greedy little hands.They are literally Killing US

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One essential ingredient of the Republican agenda
Posted by: Last Chance on Aug 18, 2008 5:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is to keep the American people distracted with foreign entanglements, like Iraq, Afghanistan, Sakartvelo (Georgia), and very soon Iran. That way the coming election can be fixed like in 2000 and 2004, only worse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dictator Bush
Posted by: GreyFoxThree on Aug 18, 2008 5:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'll just be happy to see that Dictator Bush finally removed from Office. the sooner we get that idiot out, the better off we will all be.

RD
Ultimate Anonymity

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Dictator Bush Posted by: helenwheels
» It has all been pre-arranged Posted by: Last Chance
And in this corner . . .
Posted by: hagwind on Aug 18, 2008 5:22 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OK, I think I get it now: politics is a big boxing match, maybe the heavyweight championship of the world, and it all takes place within the "ropes" of the Capital Beltway? In this corner -- Karl Rove "the Nuts Crusher"! In this corner . . . Well, it's hard to tell, because in Frank's article the bad guys all have nasty leering faces but the good guys don't have faces at all.

Conspiracy, hell. Conspiracy theories have a lot in common with religion: they're all attempts to account for complex phenomena, they're all short on empirical evidence, and they all accord Satan (by whatever name) vast power -- the better to scare you with, my dear.

"Economics are the method; the object is to change the soul," [Margaret Thatcher] said, echoing Stalin. Oooh, that's scary! Sort of like "a chicken in every pot," isn't it? It's actually a useful insight, though not a new one: material conditions affect values. Most of us think and want what we can afford to think and want, and a change in material conditions will change more hearts and minds (for better or worse) than all the eloquent arguments in the world.

Instead of obsessing about that inside-the-Beltway boxing match, let's focus on where we live and the other people who live there too. On the ground, things are so much less black and white than they are in the boxing ring. The right wing has been riding high for nearly 30 years because its leaders (including its religious leaders) listened to people on the ground -- and used what they learned to manipulate support for their program. What we're seeing now is the blatant, many-fronted failure of that program. It's a huge opportunity for liberals et al. Let's hear more on AlterNet and other progressive websites about what we're doing on the ground.

In the corridors of power where our voice is seldom heard
The status quo is what they want, they can get it with a word
For us it takes a thousand voices, a million angry shouts
To notify the ship of state to bring its course about
But if we pull together we might turn this ship around
Hold your ground

-- James Keelaghan, © 1993 Tranquilla Music (SOCAN)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The Real Deal Posted by: Last Chance
» What ARE We Doing? Posted by: grumble-bum
» RE: What ARE We Doing? Posted by: hagwind
here's the rub...
Posted by: ellie on Aug 18, 2008 5:55 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
if we thought that it would make a difference, we would all vote for the person who would UPHOLD the oath of office and the constitution, but alas, it appears that all the contenders have caved in to where the $$ is... $$ is power in american society and believe this, it ain't you or anyone else reading this thread...

the goal is for us to alienate ourselves from our political and financial system, so the $$ few can run a-muck without the rest of us bothering them...

many years ago and I can't remember who it was,(think it was a paraphrase of C. Wright Mills work) but someone said that politicians are the true second string lineup... powerful people that can change society for better or worse stay below the radar, forcing the second string to do its bidding, no matter which political party is in control...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Truth
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Aug 18, 2008 5:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As these right wing "royalists" operate to keep themselves in power, it might do them a bit of good to remember (King Louis XVI) that he lost his head literally. When and at what point will "we the people" get it - they (conservatives) are not operating in the best interest for the common good!

It is time for all of those UN-AMERICAN traitors, along with their corrupt, imperial, tyrannical system of avarice to go.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Truth Posted by: tap17x
Sounds like treason to me...........
Posted by: muktuk on Aug 18, 2008 6:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Grover Norquist's infamous quote about drowning government in a bath tub sounds like murder and treason to me. Parenthetically, does this quote give us insight into Grover Norquist's pathological personality since he uses murder as analogy?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Liberal, Conservative, rightist leftist, horse caca!
Posted by: Nightstallion on Aug 18, 2008 6:03 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let me paraphrase a Thomas Paine attitude which comes from an even earlier source. "That Government, Governs best, which Governs least: That Government which governs least is no Government AT ALL!" Though this form is attributed to Henry David Thoreau, Thomas Paine was the first to utter it in this country. In The Roman history it was Cicero, and in Greek history it was Pliny the Elder. Humans are so short lived and have no memory of previous snafus.

It is not Liberals or liberal thinking under attack here but basic freedoms, the Constitution and Democratic Ideology: Which is not in any way shape or form related to the so called Democratic Party. Please, no fuzzy thinking here the Democrats will lead us further into this war by force of indecision, ignorance and petty greed.

Don't anyone even THINK Republican at me in this time. The republicans are not capable of individual thought, they are continuously babbling about the nebulous we, us, or them and those. Gabbling horse shit about differentiating between one group and another. This Planet is not their goddamned gridiron in Gods football game. Their so called "WE" is individual people! Let those who feel individually this way; begin to act responsibly. If you have ears then hear, if you have eyes to look then see!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Like rabid rats ...
Posted by: goodsensecynic on Aug 18, 2008 6:17 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Like rabid rats, they are doubly dangerous when cornered, and demonically demented when allowed to run free ...

Whoops, that's just the sort of overheated rhetoric that right-wing ideologues and demogogues are apt to provoke from potential leftist ideologues and ... well, you get the idea.

The challenge to liberals is to maintain both civility and courage, to confront irrationality with cool reason and violence in word and deed with a calm commitment to peace.

This is not a species of "appeasement," but a public demonstration of the virtue that must be manifest if some small measure of decency is to prevail in our polity.

The rabid right is delusional, but its tactics of bluff and bluster, punctuated by vicious and venomous personal and political attacks derive from its Manichean distinction between its version of good and evil.

Both the form and the content of its Weltanschuuang must be firmly and consistently opposed. Those of us who genuinely believe in democracy can take hope ... though the struggle may be longer and more painful than we would wish ...

In solidarity,

Sisyphus

PS Let us not forget the words of a failed Austrian artist: "There must be no freedom for the enemies of freedom!" ... nor who said them, namely Adolph Hitler. The recollection will help sort the democratic wheat from the tyrannical chaff on all sides.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Screw civility Posted by: EinMD
» RE: Liberals, keep bending over... Posted by: helenwheels
» Pelosi Posted by: EinMD
They don't dance, they wrestle
Posted by: LMNOP on Aug 18, 2008 6:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just made a comment HERE on AlterNet about the intentions of the right with regard to debate in which I tried to deconstruct the pseudo-debate process and suggest an alternative approach as a guide to those of us who repeatedly put so much of ourselves into trying to reach these people and reason with them. It might be useful to repeat that in this context.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Cue right wing troll appologists in
Posted by: EinMD on Aug 18, 2008 6:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
3....2....1

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Know your enemy, and know your terms
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Aug 18, 2008 6:36 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The terms "left" and "right" are becoming more and more meaningless by the day. It's about the power of the state and how that power is incubated and grown until someone has enough of it to use as a weapon. Anyone who seeks to grow the power of the state is a Liberal by today's definition. For whatever reason, "liberal" no longer means what it used to mean. (Individual liberty, personal freedom, etc.) I dont think it ever really meant that, in the eyes of the elites. Liberal has had a parallel definition for decades. For the general masses, it was all about liberty and freedom. But for the elite controllers, it's about "more government", "more power", "more control", "more debt", etc. That is the de facto definition of Liberal. Because you have to give them the power, and if you do, then they Might give you a handout. Might. For a little while, maybe. If you behave. If you act like a good little slave. Why is this so hard to understand?

New Deal, Great Society, Military Industrial Complex, these things are what feed the corrupt entities in government. It's not a free market capitalist system, and its not a socialist system. Its just a festering stinking slimy oozing puss-filled cadaver of corruption. It is private entities buying legislation which is filled with loopholes they use to enrich themselves at the taxpayer's expense. Whatever good this system does is plainly not worth the damage it does.

This is why libertarianism is a requirement for the nation's survival. If you have a nation of dumbed down propagandized fools who can't accept responsibility for their lack of basic education, then the LAST thing you want to do is give them anything resembling a handout. There is only one way to break the cycle, and that is to allow people who want to be decadent and complacent to suffer the well understood consequences. Attempting to help these people can only give the government more power to make things worse.

If you really want to help people, go volunteer. There are so many ways to help people, without further empowering the state.

The social welfare programs only appeared to work because of the vast amounts of resource wealth that was being harvested during the mid 20th century. The US was the world's largest oil exporter and we had a relatively intelligent and engaged citizenry. Now we import oil and export poop culture and rotted brain cells. It is only a matter of time before the welfare state completely collapses this country. This fact should be obvious to everyone by now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: HOOOO hahahahahahaha Posted by: Crazy H
» Fingerpointing Posted by: EinMD
This could easily lead to bloodshed
Posted by: PJAW on Aug 18, 2008 6:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Modern conservatism" is the moniker they have chosen, but they are in fact social Darwinists. Which is ironic in the extreme since they denounce evolution as a failed theory or some kind of extremist liberal conspiracy to drive God out of our lives. Social Darwinists believe that the strongest or fittest should survive and flourish in society, while the weak and unfit should be allowed to die. Beyond that, they typically allow themselves license to do whatever it takes to assure themselves survival and prosperity, which then reenforces their belief that they are the strongest and fittest. Lying, cheating, stealing and mass murdering are not beyond what they allow themselves to partake in to "win". And of course their "victories" simply confirm their superiority and they scorn anyone they have "conquered". The Nazis were social Darwinists, as are "modern conservatives". Yet they have declared themselves to be the truest adherents to the constitutional principals upon which this particular nation was founded.

One thing they have right, at least in their public pronouncements, when someone has declared war on you, and is attempting to kill you, you must defend yourself, by any means necessary. Which includes killing them first. This might very well happen as more and more people recognize themselves as being the target of, or at least "collateral damage" of, the conservative movement. Taking away your means of earning a living, your home, your access to clean air and water and life saving health care may be less direct than dropping a bomb on you, but it's equally effective over time. It's a struggle to be optimistic in the current social environment.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Don't hold your breath. Posted by: mcartri
Too late. Already happened and succeeded.
Posted by: jwverez on Aug 18, 2008 6:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ever since 1980, the Democrats and even some of the liberals and progressives ignored the undermining that has been going on. Today, most Democrats and especially the leadership are ready to give the GOP one toy after another despite the fact that as late as 2006, we the voters made it clear that we asked for a different leadership that would stop. To make matters worse, ask any Democrat to repair an issue be it the war in Iraq or the broken down economy and like a lazy school principal, they'll say shit like "my hands are tied and there aren't enough votes" or "we'll look into it next election". My fifth grade teacher in Georgia had one thing to say about "excuses" in general and I'd say it applies here too: "Excuses are work too". When you've had more than enough of both parties inventing shitty "excuses", you might want to go on the offensive and tell them "Excuses are work too and you're FIRED !" Sorry Mr. Frank but there is no reason to support the Democrats anymore as they've worked hard as hell via "excuses" to prove Nader's assertion that there isn't a dime's worth of a difference between the two parties. At this point, the Democrats might as well finish get busy dying because they ain't living up to what they claim to stand for anyway.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Agreed Posted by: EinMD
» RE: Not voting for Nader either--- Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: Not voting for Nader either--- Posted by: helenwheels
Since the success of the ....................
Posted by: edieb on Aug 18, 2008 6:58 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
New Deal the right has been working to bring down the middle-class.
In the 60' and 70's, for instance, they saw what a powerful middle-class could do to affect needed change in our society.
Ronald Reagan was a wet dream come true; not only an attractive puppet, but one who could play well to the stupidity and ignorance of the public. Now, they stand bemused; wondering, what happened? They cannot face the fact that people like the Reagan Democrats pissed away the futures of their children; so now they just hate the brown people and still support the Rapepublicans.
"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."
HL Mencken
Some things never change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Since the success of the ....................
Posted by: edieb on Aug 18, 2008 6:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
New Deal the right has been working to bring down the middle-class.
In the 60' and 70's, for instance, they saw what a powerful middle-class could do to affect needed change in our society.
Ronald Reagan was a wet dream come true; not only an attractive puppet, but one who could play well to the stupidity and ignorance of the public. Now, they stand bemused; wondering, what happened? They cannot face the fact that people like the Reagan Democrats pissed away the futures of their children; so now they just hate the brown people and still support the Rapepublicans.
"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."
HL Mencken
Some things never change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What exactly do we need the Liberals for?
Posted by: chlamor on Aug 18, 2008 7:11 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I recognize that many people here define themselves as "liberals" and therefore, may reject whatever came before... but it is still important to know what that was.

It is also true that "liberals" and "leftists" may find themselves allied on many issues or tactics and may well need each other under those circumstances.

Finally, it is true that "liberal" or "leftist" may refer to "political labels", applied by "the right", by others, or even by oneself, and have no particular relevance to the actual issues which divide "liberals" and "leftists".

Nonetheless... historically, liberals and leftists are not only not different points in a common spectrum but, in the end, are implacable enemies. And the issue is precisely joined on the issue of class, as has been mentioned before in this forum but now seems to have disappeared from the general lexicon.

If the term "left" has any meaning other than a purely relative one, it is as that group of political ideas, parties, movements, and organizations which believes that politics is driven less by ideas than by interests and that those interests are based on economic class. Radical republicans (Civil War variety), revolutionary democrats, social democrats (including even a sizable chunk of the British Labor Party and the German SDs of today), socialists, utopian socialists, agrarian socialists, communists, anarchists, anarco-syndicalists, and nihilists - if these do not agree on anything else, they agree on the centrality of social classes even before they divide on what to do about them.

In contrast, "Liberals" explicitly reject the centrality of social classes. If such exist at all, they are assumed to be trumped by a common interest (national or otherwise) and any division is based only on transitory political opinion or policy. They are united with "Conservatives" in their agreement on the fundamental norms of society and on their long-term objectives (most importantly in the defense of private property and the projection of "national interest"). Indeed, for them, the current organization of society is the only one conceivable.

To the Liberals, the Left is a competitor for the same political constituency they claim to represent. The Left fosters "national division" and "class hatred" where moderation and "cooler heads" might otherwise prevail. They are often hand-cuffed by the "extreme demands" and "lack of reform mindedness" of the Left. If things come to a head, they can even justify arresting the Left... in the interest of "the greater good", of course (see Palmer, McCarthy, many more...).

The Left returns this attitude with interest... They regard the Liberals as the reform party of the ruling class. From this standpoint, the Liberals most assuredly need the Left. We are the monsters-beneath-the-bed that they invariably point to as a reason for the Conservatives to negotiate "reform"... "If you don't deal with us you may have to tackle the great unwashed". That is what "playing the class card" or "race card" means.

What exactly do we need the Liberals for? If there turns out to have been a misunderstanding of biblical prophesy and tomorrow all Liberals are suddenly captured by the Rapture and disappear from the face of the earth... how much worse off would we be? Would Rove suddenly be "turned loose" because Joe Biden was no longer there to protect us?

They ask:
"Why can't we just get along?"
We ask:
"Which side are you on?"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Who's Apologizing For What? Posted by: pdxjoe
» Apologist Posted by: pdxjoe
» RE: Apologist Posted by: LMNOP
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A LIBERAL
Posted by: chlamor on Aug 18, 2008 7:16 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I offer this a starting point.

A Leftist says that the fundamental organization of our society is intolerable because it leads directly to war, poverty, oppression, and environmental destruction. The Leftist argues that a new and different framework is necessary.

A Liberal says that the basic organization of our society is reasonably good, and should therefore be accepted, and that any efforts at further improving society should come from working within the already-established framework. IOW, the liberal wants slight modifications to what already exists, believing that its basic structure is reasonably sound.

Liberal- will blithely be assimilated.

Leftist- will likely be assassinated.

Liberal- possesses a quaint notion that one can reform hierarchical power structures.

Leftist- desires to completely unravel and eliminate the functions and forms of hierarchy.

Liberal- wishes to reform The Bank into The People's Credit Union.

Leftist- sees the need to turn the tables of the moneychangers and smash the marketplace.

Liberal- says "Living Wage".

Leftist- says "Solidarity".

Liberal- willingly shells out $4 for a glass of carrot juice.

Leftist- sees Root Vegetables as sustenance and metaphor.

Liberal- outside the coffee shop talks about the need for the Cappuccino Revolution but balks at acting out for fear this would endanger his/her daily cappuccino.

Leftist- reuses the same coffee filter, paper towels or odd socks when all other options have been exhausted in an attempt to squeeze one more cup from yesterday's grounds.

Liberal- wants to 'get out the vote'.

Leftist- recognizes voting as a nominal form of political activity meant to validate the Democratic State and convince the political consumer that they are a participant in governance.

Liberal- can often be seen mouthing the "education is the answer" mantra particularly in the rarified atmosphere of the Citadels of Expertise. Revels in being near theory or people 'doing theory' in the academy.

Leftist- sees education as social engineering and cultural imperialism. Education Academies seen as the proving grounds for the future ruling class.

Liberal- users of 'all natural' deodorant. The armpits are fresh particularly during commercial breaks.

Leftists- recognize deodorant as one of the essential pillars of Empire. Will often raise their armpits in tight quarters due to quixotic impulses.

Liberal- writes lengthy position papers on the plusses of developing more efficient killing machines (See Amory Lovins for more details).

Leftist- sees the Techno Warfare State as one of the great life destroying mechanisms in the history of Mankind and understands the relationship between war and oppression. The "Health of the State" being that which kills everything else.

Liberal- true believers in the New Economy and Seattle (the city) home of Microsoft, Boeing and Starbucks.

Leftist- acknowledge a different Seattle (the Amerindian prophet)


Liberals- have recently been experiencing a population explosion which seems to have been caused by a grey form of technocratic inbreeding. Liberalism is now a major growth industry much like Cancer. Much of this exponential proliferation of this well-groomed disease seems to emanate directly from Academia.

Leftists- an endangered species. Said to be only 723 remaining in the contiguous 48 states of the United States of America. For years they have been scooped up and exiled to the Periphery. To date all efforts to exhume the spirit of Eugene Debs have fallen on deaf ears.

Remember the Palmer Raids?

Palmer was a liberal Democrat.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Who Can Argue? Posted by: pdxjoe
A 1000 Years of Darkness...
Posted by: Godfather89 on Aug 18, 2008 7:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Its your choice, we need to wake people up. We cant just be talking to the same people, we need to convert more people. We need pro-liberal citizens, to understand that America was founded under Liberalism but more so, Libertarianism. We need as a people to do what the Declaration of Independence has told us, Save liberty and fight the government (Alter or Abolish it altogether)!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A 1000 Years of Darkness... Posted by: Godfather89
» Melodrama Posted by: EinMD
Winning Strategy
Posted by: US Citizen on Aug 18, 2008 8:04 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The George W. Bush administration has come up with a winning strategy for destroying Social Security. The strategy is to have such a huge national debt that future administrations will need to gut Social Security in order to pay the debt off. At some point, the natoinal debt will cause such a crisis for the United States that the only solution will be to cut back Social Security.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Winning Strategy Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: Winning Strategy Posted by: anothername
» RE: Winning Strategy Posted by: john mont
where does the responsivlilty rest for this mess
Posted by: grkjr on Aug 18, 2008 8:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now that i have read so much about "liberalism and leftism", i now don't know what i am.. but never the less i do think that the mess we are in is not due to the presentation of the different roads which a society may take, by our leaders choosing one or the other (that choice has become narrower with each passing election).. It is us; "look in the mirror" who are responsible for the changes that have taken place over the last 40 years in which democrat and republican have both bought into the conservative path to riches "for all". It is our individual greed brought on by tasting how great it was to be affluent, following the "new deals" being put in place. The foundations which built the middle class, this "great society" with its sharing of the fruits of its labor, retirement benefits, anti-trust, personal freedoms... etc etc.. As the middle class tasted how nice it was they soon fell victim to the same sickness that befalls most money chasers.. wanting more and thus becoming more "taken in" to the garbage spewed out by the right about "big govt and waste" as the blinders were now on and we could taste the possibility that we too could have unending wealth building if only the govt was not taxing and thus stealing our hard earned money..We soon forgot that is was the "new deal" liberal govt that got us where we were with strong unions and middle class wealth for the majority of americans for the first time in history... No, tis us and our greed that has put into office those who now continue down the same path that we have voted for over the last 40 years. It just may be too late as we still cling to the notion that what is good for me is good for the nation as versus what is good for the nation as a whole is good for me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Plot Against Liberal America
Posted by: snowdude38 on Aug 18, 2008 8:19 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The best path to undue what has been done is to get Obama into the Whitehouse and for Dems to take over the Senate & Congress with a fillabuster proof pure majority of 75%. We must do our part and VOTE in MASS in November for Democrats.

Internationally

A. Once we have our people in place the repugnants will have no recourse to the set course of Democracy. First we must end the Iraq war and bring our young men and women home. I would also bring down our presense in Afganistan to small but very mobile quick strike forces; Marine Recon and Army Delta Forces to lead & train Afgani forces agaist AlQuedda.

B. Shift the war funding back to domestic spending funds like education, refunding social security, and federally funded universal healthcare (prenatal to cradle to grave).

C. Rebuild our alliances with truly democratic nations and create a coallition of democracy to ensure the promotion of truly democratic ideals and the advancement of democratic philosphies throughout the world.


Domestically

1. We must vilify the repugnant causes, call it what it truly is; a movement to destroy the middle class. Let the repugnants scream "class warfare", and we will point out that this has been their game since 1980.

2. Outlaw lobbyist! Remove the money and remove the corrution... period.

3. Make clear using history as the example that repugnants call for fiscal control but never assert any such control during their administrations. Deficits have risen out of control during the Reagan/Bush/Shrub trifecta over the last 28 years with only the minor reduction by the only Democrat during that period of time. So we make the argument "Who are the real & true fiscal managers?". Do not state this as "fiscal conservatism". We must remove this word & phrase from the democratic dictionary.

4. Return American jobs to the American people! The American businesses must employ 75% of their workforce inside the USA with legal American workers or lose all tax breaks and incentives. If they choose to operate as a non-American companies by moving all activity offshore, we create the expatriot import tax and tariffs that will make their products to expensive to import or sell to the American people. We ensure that all Americans know that this was the corporate whores choice to make.
Buy American, made by Ameircan Union hands!!

5. Bolster and solidify the unions to ensure that even if the party of hate returns to the whitehouse, they will be powerless against the mighty workers. Thier messages of hate and division will fall on deaf ears as America returns to full employment in a 100% unionized American workforce.

6. Attack the high cost of education and bring higher education back to the masses. We should transfer the cost of the war into our education systems. This will allow schools to reduce the costs of education, via federal funding to all levels of education. Use the money to provide more scholarships to lower income and middle income families. An educated electorate will vote democratically, they will be better informed and more likely to vote for candidates that propose a better America for all of us, not just the richest of us.

7. Universal Health Care for every American, prenatal to cradle to grave. What we are spending on the war in three months will provide healthcare for all Americans for a year. If its acceptable to spend so much on death and destruction, why isn't acceptable to spend less on the health and well being of all our people?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Plot Against Liberal America Posted by: edgeofnowhere
Clinton and Gingrich
Posted by: sausage on Aug 18, 2008 8:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"[Grover Norquist's] coup de grace is that the Democratic Party in its entirety would become "a dead man walking" with the privatization of social security.

New book The Pact: Bill Clinton, Newt Gingrich, and the Rivalry that Defined a Generation details Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich's scheme to privatize Social Security and how the Monica Lewinsky "scandal" ended the attempt.

Thank gawd for a blow job in the Oval Office, a cigar, semen on a blue dress and an opera buffa of an impeachment.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» idiots. Posted by: EinMD
Good point
Posted by: helenwheels on Aug 18, 2008 8:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I remember back in the 70's growing up in the midwest, most of my friends' parents were republican and mine were democrats (the minority in our town). It was not a big deal. We still managed to get along and intermingle. Nowadays, I rarely spend time with anyone who calls themself a "conservative" or republican unless I can't avoid it. They have changed. The "conservative" of today (aka "neocon") is not conservative in the least. They are radical at best and fascist at worst.

I found this out the annoying way, by having the audacity to author a blog as a liberal, feminist, independent woman. I have been stalked and trolled, insulted, defamed, so I can relate: YES , in my experience, today's neocon wants to destroy the opposition. Actually, right now a neocon shrub-loving stalker has pictures of me, my real name, and lies about me plastered all over his blog. He also discovered my business site, contacted all my clients, and told them I'm a big liar and my blog pseudonym I write under. This was 2 years ago and the harassment continues. I had to turn on comment moderation to keep his "spam" away but he's so desperate to destroy my blog and my reputation that it's galling.

Meanwhile, I have all of this stalker's personal information as well because he had at one point posted it on his blog. But I don't use it against him because my code of ethics doesn't allow it.

One of the things he says is that liberals are monsters and yes, he heavily touts that Goldberg screed about liberals being nazis. He truly believes we should be DESTROYED much as Michael Savage-Wiener is always saying.

And if you think my experience is isolated, think again. Nearly every liberal-leaning woman blogger has her share of stalkers, some more menacing than others. I don't know if any conservative women bloggers can have this complaint - I'm sure they have "trolls" but it's a far cry between trolls and actual stalkers, who take it to the next level.

I honestly believe that neocons are insane or the insane are drawn to that party because of the sadistic way they treat the opposition.

Michelle Malkin is the first one I remember using the new trend of publishing people's personal contact information in hopes that one of her goons - driven to fury against us monstrous "lefties" - would do something to them. She posted all the personal contact info on her blog of a bunch of protesters she disagreed with. Then, when they turned the tables on her, she was completely horrified and turned into a whiney victim. This is what they do. This is what my stalker does. And this is what all the hatemongers do. They feel justified because they have definied us as monsters (e.g., subhuman). Remember who else did this.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» OMG Posted by: EinMD
» Ethics. Posted by: EinMD
» Not wise. Posted by: EinMD
» Pacifists Posted by: EinMD
Underlying Psychology of Politics
Posted by: Elurby on Aug 18, 2008 9:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
#######
#######


For those wishing to learn
the ROOT CAUSE of the
political affiliations of
LEFT and Right, read my
below articles:

Underlying Psychology of Politics
http://underlyingpsychologyofpolitics.blogspot.com/


#######
#######

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh please!
Posted by: dockboy on Aug 18, 2008 9:36 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is no plot. Liberals are simply paranoid schizos suffering from excessive cynicism and bitter hatred. After all, it is liberals who want to reinstate the very misnamed "Fairness" doctrine. All this will do is eliminate conservative media outlets. There is no similar move by conservatives.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» lol Posted by: EinMD
» No need to pull the plug Posted by: EinMD
Political Exile of the Opposition...
Posted by: ranchero42 on Aug 18, 2008 9:42 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is the only option left when your platform contains nothing but noxious vapors. Totalitarianism is the sole possibility for any who embrace a utopian nightmare labeled "New World Order". The Revelationaries use a discredited screed like the rantings of St. John the Insane to form the basis for their movement, when avarice and longing for indentured servitude and worse crimes against humanity are their only guides for passage into the 21st century since non-visionaries like our pussyLord Jesus Christ. Welcome to hell.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Eventually we will have a Police State
Posted by: bh on Aug 18, 2008 9:55 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have been moving towards a police state for some thirty years. It's easy! Once our Corporations have complete control over government they hire private police and Wala, democracy is over. The vast majority of our citizens don't care. They really don't. So, I'll collect my social security check as long as it lasts and watch the future unfold. It's up to the younger generation to give a shit and they don't!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The End of Democracy Posted by: pdxjoe
» Eventually? Posted by: EinMD
In a perfect world
Posted by: bh on Aug 18, 2008 10:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I once felt like "snowdude38", his message is clear and precise. I use to have the same vision and hope. Wish his vision could come true. I suppose I'm a little pessimistic these days. But keep up the fight....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: In a perfect world Posted by: snowdude38
Neocons are Liberals Disguised as Conservatives
Posted by: Elurby on Aug 18, 2008 10:09 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
#######
#######

You ought to do your research on what
"neo-conservatism" means--ought to
learn about their left-wing TROTSKYITE
history; that is, if you dig deeply,
you'll find that neo-conservatives are
pseudo-conservatives!, hiding behind a
mask of traditional conservative values
while upholding socialist/communist
intentions for a NWO--for installing
ONE-WORLD GOVERNMENT.

Begin here:

"The conservatives' full-scale rejection of
the modern state did not motivate the
founders of neoconservatism....Some of
them had been advocates of Marxist
revolution or socialist take-over in their
early years. All of them [the neocons]
were liberal Democrats in their middle age.
Then they saw the error of their ways."
-Gary North

-then here:

http://www.newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=1098-quinn

-and here:

http://www.rense.com/general39/meets.htm

Ironically, NEOCONS are closeted leftists who
work to establish one-world government under
Global Economic Socialism, which goal requires
militaristic control of the world through
empire-building.

If liberals who post here knew the full truth
of it, they'd be cheering Bush and his fellow
neoconservative SOCIALISTS, as they are trying
- STEALTHILY - to build UNIVERSAL SOCIALISM
via THIRD-WAY politics (( Google "Third Way politics" and learn its meaning )).

#######
#######

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Uh... no Posted by: Smackback
» Hot for Trotsky Posted by: Lloyd Drako
» Holy Crap! Posted by: EinMD
» wtf? Posted by: Cathyblj
but, it's not a 'closed" system
Posted by: Ripcord on Aug 18, 2008 10:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the Global Economy is now an "open" system

When the U.S. economy is viewed as a "closed" system,
the increase in our national debt to gut liberal government seems to hold true,
like in a "closed" physical system entropy increases
(gas reaches an energy-less flat equilibrium)

but the U.S. debt is no longer owned by ourselves;
the economy is global;
the system is "open."

We now have a huge foreign/trade deficit--
and the lenders are emerging powers like China--
so even though our entropy increases,
there is a new local focus where energy increases--
entropy decreases there--
Red China!

Our national facsist conservative Republicans are also cutting their own throats--

How dumb we all are!

I'm no economist,
so tell me where I'm wrong.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This article touches on many things, but not one...
Posted by: djnoll on Aug 18, 2008 10:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read this article yesterday on Truthout and commented there on what is forgotten by many, so I will try to note it here.

Liberals were once the party of the Republicans - yep, its true! They espoused such things as the end of slavery; support of the environment; and states rights. Then came a change brought about by the rise of corporations who partners with the military during WWII - the creation of the industrial-military complex that a REPUBLICAN president warned us about to no avail. Why did they start to back the Republican party - because of two factors: The Democrats were fighting a losing war in Vietnam and Ronald Reagan promised more riches and the dumbing down of America with the rise of the ignorant religious right zealots as a voting base. They took over the party and started forcing policies that raised the level of ignorance in this country to levels that are unacceptable in a free democracy.

Republicans and corporations made being intelligent and educated (things we used to want in our leaders, not puppets with heads filled with sawdust)something to be ashamed of or needing an apology for to the public. They started using fear as a weapon against the American people, and they called anyone who challenged their ambitions as cowards and unpatriotic. They co-opted the word "Patriot" and changed it from meaning someone who fought for freedom, to someone who followed blindly into war and voted against their own interests.They stopped being the liberal party, and started portraying the Democratic Party as Liberals, cowards, and un-American.

Now the Democratic Party was the original party of such political conservatives as John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, and Lyndon Johnson, as well as the New York and Chicago political machines. It was not a liberal organization by any definition of the word, except for FDR who brought us WWII as a solution to the Depression and a way to jump start corporate interests that were failing, as well as the New Deal programs that built the US infrastructure but also created the model for Welfare-to-Work, the new slavery program embraced by the Republicans in the 1990's and rubber stamped by the Clintons.

It was only with the rise of the anti-war movement and Jimmy Carter did we see a shift in the party line. With the Great Society Plan of LBJ as a response to the anti-war/social justice/civil rights movements, the party adopted a societal focus and liberal ideals we know today. They were willing to embrace those who still strove for an education at any expense; those who understood that the planet was a living being and needed help; and the importance of energy independence, social capital without sacrificing social justice, and that war and empire building in a global economy was not the answer. They recognized that a self-sufficient nation was a secure nation, and that equality was something that was earned, not just given to people if they are to be truly free. So, corporate America labeled them Liberals and made them demons so that idiots like Bush could terrorize them with the help of the likes of Cheney and Rove.

Being liberal in our history and today is not something that is inherently wrong. It is something fundamentally right in our history and in our times. Remember - Liberal and Liberty have the same root word, and you cannot have the latter without being the first. The Forefathers who fought in 1776 were Liberals - and it is time for us to be the same in order to secure our Liberty once again.

So, remember - Liberal = Liberty! Vote in November and vote for such things as education for all, jobs in America, health care for all, sustainable practices, an end to war, but mostly, vote for Liberty!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Erasing Liberal Ideology In Action
Posted by: grokagain on Aug 18, 2008 10:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you have any doubts at all as to the effectiveness of erasing liberal ideology, take a look at these topix threads from a small little impoverished town that I live in; Russell Springs, Kentucky. This town, consisting of a majority poverty level citizens, see the problem as other poverty level citizens. The concept of what is going on in the "upper crust" of the economic strata is inconceivable to them.

http://www.topix.net/forum/city/russell-springs-ky/ TU9NCASDHT15QM4KB


you will need to remove the space between the forward slash and the TU. There's a 60 character max for posting a comment on here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nate
Posted by: krzyn8 on Aug 18, 2008 10:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
ok, so it is clear to me that after bing a reader of this site for 5 months now that we all know what is the problem. So... what do we do about it? Are we really the Americans that sit around and bitch about out great country going up in flames, yet do nothing? Please tell me what to do.
I agree with you on what the problems are:
1. Corporate America is unchecked
2. Politicians are paid off
3. Greed is destroying us from the inside
4. The media is paid off
5. Education is null and void
6. Etc, Etc!
what do we do?
i see immigrants, being more like Americans and going out and protesting their rights as human beings more than actual tax paying citizens. Are we scared? Or lazy? Tell me!
also what is the answer? It is the same with Obama, he knows what is wrong but he is not telling us what he is going to do to fix it. no one is. Everybody that is brave enough to stand up and say what is wrong is not smart enough to actually do what it takes to make a change in this country. Why?
Sorry i am just so tired of coming to this website and made to fill like my great country is being ransacked, and no one cares. I mean for me here in NC I feel so alone on this. And hopelessness is what i am left with.

HELP! SOS our ship is sinking!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Nate Posted by: Lincoln fan
You are now just figuring this out?
Posted by: chirho33 on Aug 18, 2008 11:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hello? You are now just figuring out that conservatives do not want to debate and only want to destroy? Where have you been since at least the late 1980s? Lee Atwater? Karl Rove? Grover Nordquist? Swiftboaters? Paul Weyreich? The Heritage Foundation? The AEI? The YAF? Tom Delay? Etc. Etc. Wake up! Just because America is disgusted with Republicans doesn't mean liberals get a free pass. We want this election? We're going to have to WORK for it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

They are not Conservatives
Posted by: marid on Aug 18, 2008 11:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and I know not what they really are. A Goldwater Conservative believed in 1. Paying our bills, how we doing on that? 2. Stay out of my life, how we doing on that one also? 3. Stay out of other countries business, another golly gee here too.

These Republicans are not conservative in any way. The terms social Darwinist, fascist, Oligarchy, Aristocracy, Dictatorship all come to mind but definitely not Conservative.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: They are not Conservatives Posted by: boing007
» Correct Posted by: EinMD
Republicans
Posted by: Fredric Frank on Aug 18, 2008 11:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Remember that old joke about lawyers; "...the only good lawyer is a dead lawyer..." Well this MUST holds doubly true for Republicans. We can never hope to save this country if we do not begin NOW to start a recall of the very corrupt "liberals" like Nancy Poposi and Harry Reid. We have had them in a position to reverse and investigate, plus to start the impeachment of both BUSH & CHENEY, yet they have openly refused and have done nothing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hmmm...
Posted by: tHetrIp on Aug 18, 2008 12:57 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...get government out of the business of governing, make quality of life solely the dictat of capital, and the government simply a security apparatus to protect capital. Sounds efficient.
Also sounds a lot like a dictatorship

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well...
Posted by: jwhitneywise on Aug 18, 2008 1:15 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm pretty liberal, and I have to say that it would be really freakin' nice to destroy my political opposition without debate!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Problem well stated, but no solution given.
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Aug 18, 2008 2:13 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"the job of all revolutions to make permanent their gains."

Of course, the American Revolution was incomplete. The common citizen has always been governed by a minority and always will be. Majority rule is mathematically impossible because there is no majority that agrees on all of the issues. So it's not a question of "making permanent their gains" in the American Revolution but to decide which minority is best fitted to rule

“by forcing unions to get annual written approval from every member before spending union funds on political activities.”

This is a "two edged sword". If "we, the people" were in power we could force corporations to get written permission from each stockholder before spending corporate funds on political activities. While the corporatocracy is in control of both parties this is impossible. Therefore, the first step in the solution is for the people to take control.

There are three ways to take control:
1. Have an armed revolution. For many reasons this is an impracticable solution.

2. Vote a third party into power. Given the recent track records of third parties, this is highly unlikely. Again it can be proven mathematically that any third party is an extremely long shot.

3. The last possibility is for each voter to tell both parties, before the election, that he/she will cast a protest write-in vote if neither party supports his/her stand on his/her most important issue.

Given the close margins in recent past elections it would take only a small percentage of the voters to swing the election. We can't vote for both parties but we can vote against both parties. We can make the politicians work for our votes instead of corporate dollars.

a plutocracy that will stand, regardless of who wins the next few elections.

In my opinion, and considering the following quote, also the subconscious opinion of the writer, the plutocracy will stand in perpetuity unless we take control outside of party politics.

Throwing the rascals out is no longer enough. The problem is structural.

Anyone interested in further information e-mail me at lincoln0212@msn.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Sorry, solution not that easy Posted by: ClearEye
"Throwing the rascals out" would be a good first step.
Posted by: antiapathy on Aug 18, 2008 2:30 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But the American voters are too apathetic and brainwashed to realize they even have a choice. They have several choices, the Green Party being one that comes to mind.

As long as so-called liberals and leftists keep voting for the Democratic branch of the fascist party nothing will change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Telling Conservatives and Liberals apart
Posted by: anothername on Aug 18, 2008 2:31 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Conservative: Believes in a luxury motor vehicle that does not have to stop at stop signs, red lights, pedestrian crosswalks, police, state troopers, vehicles being driven at the speed limit; doesn't have to obey parking regulations; is not taxed in any way; and nobody gets in the path of the vehicle.

Liberal: Believes in a luxury bicycle that does not have to stop at stop signs, red lights, pedestrian crosswalks, police, state troopers, vehicles being driven at the speed limit; doesn't have to obey parking regulations; is not taxed in any way; and nobody gets in the path of the bicycle.

Libertarian: Drives a motor vehicle or rides a bicycle, does not believe in stop signs, red lights, pedestrian crosswalks, police, state troopers, vehicles having speed limits, parking regulations, or taxes of any sort, as long as nobody gets in the path of the vehicle or bicycle.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Good point Posted by: bobtr900
Dicopline
Posted by: wormfarmer on Aug 18, 2008 2:59 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are now reaping the product of deregulation, our species needs limits, or we become, "Monkeys with Fire", (no insult to simians), or THIS happens. An unregulated species destroys either itself, or its environment, thereby it is suicide by deregulation. As an unwitting american, (I'm stuck with it), how many times do we have to go down this road? We have had numerous financial crises since the establishment of this nation and they have all been caused by the quest for easy money. Don't misunderstand my attitude, but we're running out of time, excuses, and patience. Most financial crises have been cured with the economic remedy of war, (which corporations have profited from, every time), but war is a failed policy for the public, not corporations. The populace in this country are manipulated by most things new and shiny, and are diverted from the more serious issues of fouling our nest, desecration of our home, lets face it folks, there is nowhere to run when we screw this environment up, (no matter what the space agencies say), so lets start paying attention to idealists, (like Ralph Nader), and take control of our planet and culture and provide an environment suitable for the survival of future generations. We're pissing it away, folks.
Tim Matthews, Planetary Citizen. Vote Sanity, Vote Nader.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Rubicon
Posted by: wormfarmer on Aug 18, 2008 3:29 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As an unwitting american, (I'm stuck with it), how many times do we have to go down this
road? We have had numerous financial crises since the establishment of this nation and
they have all been caused by the quest for easy money. Don't misunderstand my attitude, but we're running out of time, excuses, and patience. Most financial crises have been cured
with the economic remedy of war, (which corporations have profited from, every time),
but war is a failed policy for the public, not corporations. The populace in this country are
manipulated by most things new and shiny, and are diverted from the more serious issues
of fouling our nest, desecration of our home, lets face it folks, there is nowhere to run
when we screw this environment up, (no matter what the space agencies say), so lets start
paying attention to idealists, (like Ralph Nader), and take control of our planet and culture and provide an environment suitable for the survival of future generations.
We're pissing it away, folks.
Tim Matthews, Planetary Citizen. Vote Sanity, Vote Nader.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Drown us
Posted by: bobtr900 on Aug 18, 2008 5:35 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Repubs want to reduce government, or so they say. Despite the fact that they are really are turiing government over to their corrupt friends so they can make profits over what the taxpayers have created and therefore own. So they want to reduce us because we represent government by, for and of the people. While they want government by, for and of their corporatocracy.

So they, the Repubs and their right wing religions, will reduce us so that they can 'drown us in a bathtub'. And their right wing religions, including my own, are helping them because they have identified us as being socialist, which to them is anti business. Anything that gets in the way of Big Business or Big Religion is anti profits and that is how they identify us, as being anti profits, their profits, their idea of profits.

I am amazed, on an almost daily basis, how their religions have joined them in
our destruction. Their level of hate is almost unprecedented. The last time the world saw this kind of hate was before and during WWII and was directed at the Jews, primarliy, and secondarily at the entire free world secondarily..

An aside...
One of Bush's buddies, Pervez Musharreff, has anounced he will resign. How did the Pakistanis accomplish this, and how can we do the same, to the Bushies and to their religions.

What a cabal of horrors and evil. They all are the evil of rampant profits, and only profits and nothing else. They are guilty of putting profits above morals. That is why they keep attacking us on our morals, their atack on us isnothing more than a smoke and mirrors snake pit of craven profit raping.

Their kind of thinking created one holocaust and now we are the next holocaust victims.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Uh, Yeah!
Posted by: HeatherC on Aug 18, 2008 7:00 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Conservatives don't want to debate, they want to destroy their opposition."

Uh, yeah, that's the whole idea. Just like liberals are always trying to do. So what's the point?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Uh, Yeah! Posted by: Cybershaman
» Don't bother Posted by: LMNOP
Lilly
Posted by: Lilly on Aug 18, 2008 7:15 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is absolutely one of the best and most insightful articles I have read since this nightmare began. I've noticed also the pervasive opinion that "conservative" means "normal" and "liberal" means "aberrant". It frightens me that a whole generation of young people have grown up thinking the United States is actually the way it's been seeming lately---they think this madness is just ordinary.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

14 Characteristics of Fascism
Posted by: Lilly on Aug 18, 2008 7:21 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you haven't already seen it, google "The 14 Characteristics of Fascism". Quite a lot of it will sound familiar.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

xtine
Posted by: xtine on Aug 18, 2008 8:22 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't understand why there is an instruction on this website not to respond to posts by "people who only want to derail the conversation with conservative talking points." but to 'report' these comments. How do you define "conservative talking points"? How could anyone's point derail a conversation if they are not engaging in any of the other guidelines?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: xtine Posted by: Quannah
» This is not an article comment Posted by: ClearEye
BA
Posted by: mnstra on Aug 18, 2008 8:24 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Liberals will kill themselves .Liberals like to focus on the starving in Africa and turn away from the starvation down the street.That is why they are doomed to fail.Conservatives are the Nazis of the present.Take you pick.Between the two what has transpired America to improve everyone's Quality of life.? Nothing but more pollution.
Vote Nader. I will vote my conscience because i have integrity and will vote my conscience.not
for some shallow candidate like Obama.
Who cares about the liberals.........They as a group are just as corrupt.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» We have achieved Godwin Posted by: EinMD
Conservatism Defined
Posted by: localhost008 on Aug 18, 2008 10:03 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Conservatism, n.:

1. a belief that individual rights are for persons and corporations who can afford political lobbyists and finance political campaigns of persons who'll vouch on their behalf (corporations are persons by American business law; you'll never see a corporation in jail)

2. the concept of an aristocratic oligarchy (See: plutocracy) to run all aspects of government on behalf of corporate/nationalist interests (See: 'fascism') and to protect those interest from "mob rule" (Con slang for Democracy)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dismantling the middle class should be the LAST thing that conservatives should strive for.
Posted by: RON_KING on Aug 19, 2008 1:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is from these ranks that they draw their greatest numbers, and thus their political power. It is also from these ranks that they draw their greatest source of renewal wealth. Without a strong middle class, they would have to look to other countries for markets to sell their goods, there would be none here. After you finish milking the cow for the day, you do not slaughter it for dinner.

If they are successful in moving the middle class down into poverty, they would also be creating the ideal conditions for a communist takeover. What happened to all the aristocrats in Russia and China? They were executed down to the last infant. Should this occur here, our wealthy citizens should take a cue from the French and be out of the country by the time the communists/revolutionaries storm the “Bastille” in America.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

TRUTH is STUNNINGLY AWFUL, re Zionists/Neocons
Posted by: Elurby on Aug 19, 2008 5:37 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
#######
#######

Read and learn the truth
about Zionists/Neocons/
Khazars:

"Many of the DNC Zionist Communists
who defected to the RNC in 1996,
are Russia-hating, Zionist Khazarian
Jews. They have now defected back
over to the DNC and backing Obama...
the sock puppet of the pathological
Russia-hating Zbigniew Brzezinsky
and George Soros." :

http://rense.com/general83/khaz.htm

#######
#######

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» *sigh* Posted by: EinMD
» Damn! Posted by: LMNOP
This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
This is what you'll get if America goes 'Libral'
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Aug 19, 2008 8:21 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
FREEDOM
LIBERTY
REPRODUCTIVE CHOICE
TOTAL AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE
ENVIRONMENTAL CLEAN-UP
MORE AND BETTER SCHOOLS
LESS MILITARY SPENDING
GREATLY REDUCED TAXES ON LOW AND MIDDLE CLASSES
GOV'T THATSUPPORTS THE PEOPLE NOT CORPORATIONS
NO MORE WARS.
Of course if this sounds like a shitty existance you can still vote for the other guys.
Write-In Jeffrey7 for Prez '08
www.myspace.com/jeffrey1776

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Right Wing Agenda...
Posted by: ranchero42 on Aug 19, 2008 10:17 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is simply to cause liberals to expend time, energy, and "treasure" in the effort to counter every lousy idea they throw out there. Until the left wing recognizes what's real and what's not, the chances for losing ground continues. The obvious solution is to return to this old school method. The Roves and Floyd Littles have bottomless funding for carrying on the shitstorm. Rock the fascists back on their heels and send them running for cover. Works every time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tells Why Progressivism is our Only Hope
Posted by: ClearEye on Aug 20, 2008 12:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Brilliant Summary of NeoCon (ie. fascist) goals and an important read for those who want to retain the Republic in any meaningful way. The horrific aspect of this is that though they seem to have the ability to relocate power from national, representative governments to interlocking mega-corporations (going by what they've achieved so far--supra-national banking structures, the much less representative European Trade Union, the redefinition of national regulation of industry as "unfair trade", the wholesale ability to steal elections, the privatization of natural monopolies, media consolidation and corporatization, the privatization of armies), their dreams of controlling untold wealth can never be realized because in the process they are destroying the middle class that is almost the entire market demand necessary for the maintainance of wealth. In other words, they've shown that they can grab the whole pie for themselves, but by doing so they're dramatically shrinking the pie.

The impulse that drives this is a kind of lizard-brain cancer of male dominance. "I don't care if I have less, as long as I (defined as my select group) am the only one who can have things and everyone else has to beg me for scraps." At this point I can hear a subset of DUers saying, "So Marx was right and capitalism is leading to an intolerable consolidation of wealth which will inevitably bring on the revolution resulting in the ownership of the means of production by the workers. I'll just sit back and let everything play out for the best."

History doesn't support that prediction. For the most part, fascism, including the consolidation of wealth, has almost always led to more fascism, sometimes to a crash in the standard of living lasting for centuries--a Dark Age. With the extent of our planet's overpopulation, and the knife-edge of environmental catastrophe on which we're teetering, the level of destruction and suffering resulting when our more reasonable and enlightened structures have completely lost control, is hard to imagine. It is in this context that I feel such desperation when I see Obama's complete lack of understanding of the global "trade" agreements (he thinks they're about trade), and his apparent belief that the ultra-powerful both can be placated, and are superior to, smarter than, those who want power widely distributed. I may be wrong, but I see progressivism as more than a nicer sort of politics. I see it as our species' only hope.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Start of solution - countervailing steps
Posted by: ClearEye on Aug 20, 2008 1:21 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The point is to fight back against changes in structure, not just keep electing the less awful candidate from a worse and worse bunch to a less and less powerful gov't. A good FIRST step is impeachment of administration that makes a policy of violating the Constitution. A good SECOND step would be to repeal those provisions of the current "trade" agreements that override national laws. A good THIRD step would be to take steps against the current consolidation of the media and re-instate the Fairness Doctrine, to allow non-corporatist voices and opinions in MSM.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

AS A START THE FEDERAL RESERVE MUST BE PLACED UNDER POLITICAL CONTROL. NOTE THAT
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Aug 24, 2008 10:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it seemed really important for the military forces to be placed under civilian control. Why not the bankers? If the bankers were under "civillian control" they couldn't run the United States. It is more than that. But that is part of the problem.

Perhaps you didn't hear Alan Greenspan admit that when he found out the Bill Clinton intended to pay off the national debt that he knew that he had to do something about it. James Carville both said it and skirted it. He said that when he died he wanted to come back as the bond market. Carville had learned that Washington danced to the tune of the bond market.

There are several ways to handle this. The debt could be paid off. It could be repudiated. This is the one thing that might force the republicans into a military coup. The American people need to know that their right is just as dangerous as the right anywhere on earth. We may yet see our Pinochet.

I can tell you this. Everyone that writes on Alternet will be the first into the "American Gulag".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]